maxjam

They’re just lucky you gave them a reply tbh.

You don't hear 'won' very often these days.
Well, not in the same sentence as Notts Forest ?

I agree. Could get wherever it's going (I don't know where that is) a lot quicker.
I will probably watch the rest of it because it's ok but if something prevented me from seeing it, I wouldn't be upset.

Agreed.

Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (Watched on Amazon)
You've probably seen the controversy online and maybe formed your own opinion already, fwiw heres mine after watching the first 3 episodes.
Personally, I think its okay.  The scenery (CGI or otherwise) is excellent, as is the soundtrack at times.  The acting and dialogue, not so great.  The story isn't really compelling yet, but its watchable enough for me at least to carry on.  I'd give it about a 6/10.
If you're not interested in the controversies, thats all you need to know ?
I'm not coming at this as a Tolkien fan.  I've seen the Peter Jackson movies and tbh enjoyed them a lot, but I've never read the books nor invested myself in the lore beyond what I can vaguely remember from watching them.  A lot of criticism I've read centres around it being Amazons vision for Middle Earth and not Tolkiens.  I can imagine as a Tolkien fan you'd be pretty disappointed, as purely a.n.other fantasy epic its not reaching any new heights - its one I'll watch then probably forget.
The diverse cast also apparently triggered a lot of people, although tbh the reviews I've read barely mention this.  Maybe a convenient distraction from the reported $1bn investment into a pretty average show?  Dunno.  Whilst some members of the cast have been pretty outspoken about the diversity of the show in the promotional tours etc, nothing in the actual show stood out as forced or cringeworthy.  If it wasn't for hearing about the controversy beforehand, I wouldn't have thought twice about it.
The Galadriel character I guess is the other sticking point.  Again, not being a Tolkien fan her combat prowess didn't really bother me (She is known as more of an angelic priestess type figure in the later movies).  She is completely overpowered compared to everyone else however which tbh was a little distracting and her characters dialogue and motivations have been written by the office junior.   
I still remember quotes from PJs LotR, this however is instantly forgettable.  Not the actor, or any of the other actors fault - if you're spending $1bn on something you hire the best writers and directors, this was however created by 2 showrunners with barely any Hollywood credits between them.  It would be okay for a run of the mill fantasy show but Tolkien as with my guilty nerdy pleasure, Star Wars, are held to different standards by their fans. 

Mandalorian 3 trailer
 

'but many of the signings are likely to be on big wages, and short-team deals of no more than a season or two'
- We we're limited by both how much we could offer and for how long.
'The issue with this is that they have very few players who are their own permanent players with genuine re-sale value on the right side of 30'
- so its a good thing the over 30s are on short contracts then?
'Short-termist signings are not the answer for The Rams. They need to build on their academy’s core foundation' 
- again, max contract allowed was 2 years. Our academy was gutted and we almost went out of business.  What do they expect, magic?
 
Bit of a flawed article imo, no real understanding of the desperate situation we were in and the restrictions we remain under.

Mandalorian 3 trailer
 

3 Episodes coming on Sept 21 ?
 

Imagine being the one of the Americans ?
(watch from 50s onwards)
 
 

3 Episodes coming on Sept 21 ?
 

…and another hugely historic document connected with the game. The Derby County Committee Meeting notes from 3rd September detailing inter alia the team to play v Bolton. This is the stuff of history {thanks to @loweman2, who else}. 

Couldn't let this day pass without reminding us...it all began today...134 years ago.
On this day 134 years ago, Derby County travelled to Pikes Lane, Bolton. They travelled by train. They were 15 minutes late and so kick-off was delayed. The delay unsettled the team because they fell 0-3 behind quickly but rallied after the break to win 6-3. Derby's goals came from George Bakewell (2), Lewis Cooper (2) and 'Lol' Plackett (2). Derby had poached all of those players from local rivals.     
Ten of the twelve teams took part in the first ever round of Championship fixtures on Saturday, 8 September 1888 and although no league table was published in any of the newspapers of the time West Bromwich Albion would have been the very first table toppers. By modern-day calculations, Derby County would have been the first ever table toppers because of their superior goal difference which was +3 after the first game. Albion won 2–0 at Stoke in front of 4,500 spectators and would have headed Preston North End, Derby County and Everton by virtue of an infinite goal average as they kept a clean sheet. Goal Average was the number of goals scored divided by the number of goals conceded. Goal Average was used to separate teams who were tied on points at that time. Preston defeated Burnley 5–2, Derby were 6–3 winners at Bolton and Everton secured the points in a 2–1 victory over Accrington. Aston Villa defender Gershom Cox was thought to have earned the distinction of scoring the first ever league goal with an unfortunate own goal in a 1–1 draw with Wolverhampton Wanderers and Fred Dewhurst opening the scoring minutes later at Preston with the first intentional goal. However the post-match reports of relative kick-off times show most games were delayed allowing for crowds to assemble. A goal by England and Bolton winger Kenny Davenport 2 minutes into the match against Derby County was scored comfortably before any other and is now regarded as the first ever football league goal. 
To put it all in context, as the Derby Team would have been arriving back at Derby station later that evening, the London newspapers would have also been arriving by train in Derby and would have been detailing how earlier that morning the body of Annie Chapman was discovered in Whitechapel, London. She was the 2nd victim of Jack the Ripper. 
The picture below shows Pikes Lane Bolton and then the shirt Derby County wore that day, thanks to @loweman2for re-producing such a brilliant and quality item. 
I will raise a glass tonight in celebration.  
 

Written by a 15 year old for his 50p pocket money 

'but many of the signings are likely to be on big wages, and short-team deals of no more than a season or two'
- We we're limited by both how much we could offer and for how long.
'The issue with this is that they have very few players who are their own permanent players with genuine re-sale value on the right side of 30'
- so its a good thing the over 30s are on short contracts then?
'Short-termist signings are not the answer for The Rams. They need to build on their academy’s core foundation' 
- again, max contract allowed was 2 years. Our academy was gutted and we almost went out of business.  What do they expect, magic?
 
Bit of a flawed article imo, no real understanding of the desperate situation we were in and the restrictions we remain under.

'but many of the signings are likely to be on big wages, and short-team deals of no more than a season or two'
- We we're limited by both how much we could offer and for how long.
'The issue with this is that they have very few players who are their own permanent players with genuine re-sale value on the right side of 30'
- so its a good thing the over 30s are on short contracts then?
'Short-termist signings are not the answer for The Rams. They need to build on their academy’s core foundation' 
- again, max contract allowed was 2 years. Our academy was gutted and we almost went out of business.  What do they expect, magic?
 
Bit of a flawed article imo, no real understanding of the desperate situation we were in and the restrictions we remain under.

'but many of the signings are likely to be on big wages, and short-team deals of no more than a season or two'
- We we're limited by both how much we could offer and for how long.
'The issue with this is that they have very few players who are their own permanent players with genuine re-sale value on the right side of 30'
- so its a good thing the over 30s are on short contracts then?
'Short-termist signings are not the answer for The Rams. They need to build on their academy’s core foundation' 
- again, max contract allowed was 2 years. Our academy was gutted and we almost went out of business.  What do they expect, magic?
 
Bit of a flawed article imo, no real understanding of the desperate situation we were in and the restrictions we remain under.

I'm not trying to make political points, just arguing that free speech and politics are intertwined - if one side can speak freely and the other side has to self censor or be censored, there is no such thing as free speech. 
Furthermore, when I mention 'politics' I am not just purely talking about politics, but the wider range of topics that are 'discussed' on social media; race, gender, guns, climate, vaccine, etc - stuff thats widely become known as identity politics, which are allied so closely to distinct political parties they are virtually indistinguishable. 
Currently, the social media global square today is owned almost exclusively by large left-wing corporations.  People can laugh at 'captured by the left' but Google, Twitter, Facebook and their employees donate overwhelmingly (90%+) to the Democrats.  Inherent bias has crept into social media and their political bias is not really a talking point anymore, more an observable reality. 
Whilst the argument is valid that if you sign up to their terms of service you know rules you have to play by, the option to sign up elsewhere and have a fraction of the same global reach does not exist.  Therefore, you either bite your tongue and play the game for as long as you can, or you go unheard.
So imho free speech and politics are virtually indistinguishable at this current moment in time, especially online.  If you can think of a somewhat contentious topic that hasn't been co-opted by identity politics in the recent past, that in turn wasn't allied to one of the main political parties, I'd be surprised.

Imagine being the one of the Americans ?
(watch from 50s onwards)
 
 

Imagine being the one of the Americans ?
(watch from 50s onwards)
 
 

Imagine being the one of the Americans ?
(watch from 50s onwards)
 
 

It is an interesting point - compare the outrage to Sinclair with the support seen over the past few days prior to Lineker - he was criticised by a Commons select committee for expressing political views and his woke (I'm joking) legion of followers lept to his defence. They were dealt with very differently, one time it is made clear Sinclair is not entitled to have radical views, Lineker was pretty much exclusively supported for his.
That said Sinclair deserved it, his comments were ill thought through and ill timed. There's always one (sometimes more) who ill judge the moment and write a few words that cost them for years. His choice, his error, his consequences.
To the point on freedom of speech, I can't add more than that freedom of speech does not come without freedom of consequences (I shall use that one more than once). My challenge that I have with people who claim to value it is pretty much always that they do it with the aim of talking 'to' rather than 'with' - it comes as a one sided privilege and some sort of free pass to express views as sacroscant.
I really think so much of the last few years could have been avoided (or better dealt with) if we'd just be a little bit more "live and let live" in our approach to dealing with others.

Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (Watched on Amazon)
You've probably seen the controversy online and maybe formed your own opinion already, fwiw heres mine after watching the first 3 episodes.
Personally, I think its okay.  The scenery (CGI or otherwise) is excellent, as is the soundtrack at times.  The acting and dialogue, not so great.  The story isn't really compelling yet, but its watchable enough for me at least to carry on.  I'd give it about a 6/10.
If you're not interested in the controversies, thats all you need to know ?
I'm not coming at this as a Tolkien fan.  I've seen the Peter Jackson movies and tbh enjoyed them a lot, but I've never read the books nor invested myself in the lore beyond what I can vaguely remember from watching them.  A lot of criticism I've read centres around it being Amazons vision for Middle Earth and not Tolkiens.  I can imagine as a Tolkien fan you'd be pretty disappointed, as purely a.n.other fantasy epic its not reaching any new heights - its one I'll watch then probably forget.
The diverse cast also apparently triggered a lot of people, although tbh the reviews I've read barely mention this.  Maybe a convenient distraction from the reported $1bn investment into a pretty average show?  Dunno.  Whilst some members of the cast have been pretty outspoken about the diversity of the show in the promotional tours etc, nothing in the actual show stood out as forced or cringeworthy.  If it wasn't for hearing about the controversy beforehand, I wouldn't have thought twice about it.
The Galadriel character I guess is the other sticking point.  Again, not being a Tolkien fan her combat prowess didn't really bother me (She is known as more of an angelic priestess type figure in the later movies).  She is completely overpowered compared to everyone else however which tbh was a little distracting and her characters dialogue and motivations have been written by the office junior.   
I still remember quotes from PJs LotR, this however is instantly forgettable.  Not the actor, or any of the other actors fault - if you're spending $1bn on something you hire the best writers and directors, this was however created by 2 showrunners with barely any Hollywood credits between them.  It would be okay for a run of the mill fantasy show but Tolkien as with my guilty nerdy pleasure, Star Wars, are held to different standards by their fans.